Someone had to do it: Rick Hitler

By Monday August 15, 2011





56 Comments
  1. President Amabo says:
    8/16/2011 at 4:29 pm

    You think you’ve seen government waste, vote tax increasing politicians in. They can collect more money and waste it even better.

    But then you never know, Seattle did manage to create 14 new jobs on a $20M grant: http://komonews.com/news/local/127844048.html

    Reply
  2. deowll says:
    8/16/2011 at 4:31 pm

    18 not my favorite candidate but Obama makes a lot of people look better by comparison.

    Reply
  3. bobbo, the pragmatic libertarian Existential Anti-Theist says:
    8/16/2011 at 4:51 pm

    Guyver–arguing labels rather than substance? Obama compromises all his supposed beliefs. Did Hitler do that? Compromise?

    I did try to focus on that single issue.

    Try it.

    Reply
  4. So what says:
    8/16/2011 at 5:14 pm

    #16 Parties are great, political parties not so much.

    Reply
  5. What? says:
    8/16/2011 at 5:25 pm

    #36 Guy,

    really?

    From the Wiki: “Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei - The party was founded out of the current of the far-right and racist German völkisch nationalist movement and the violent anti-communist Freikorps paramilitary culture that fought against the uprisings of communist revolutionaries in post-World War I Germany.[5] The party was created by Anton Drexler as a means to draw workers away from communism and into völkisch nationalism.[6]

    The party’s last leader, Adolf Hitler, was appointed Chancellor of Germany by president Paul von Hindenburg in 1933. Hitler rapidly established a totalitarian regime[7][8][9][10] known as the Third Reich.

    Nazi ideology stressed the failures of laissez-faire capitalism, communism, economic liberalism, and democracy; advocated Positive Christianity; supported the “racial purity of the German people” and that of other Northwestern Europeans; and claimed itself as the protector of Germany from Jewish influence and corruption. The Nazis persecuted those they perceived as either race enemies or Lebensunwertes Leben, that is “life unworthy of living”. This included Jews, Slavs, Roma, and so-called “Mischlinge” along with Communists, homosexuals, the mentally and physically disabled, and others. The persecution reached its climax when the party and the German state which it controlled organized the systematic murder of approximately six million Jews and six million other people from the other targeted groups, in what has become known as the Holocaust. Hitler’s desire to build a German empire through expansionist policies led to the outbreak of World War II in Europe.”

    Sounds more far right, than far left, to me.

    Reply
  6. What? says:
    8/16/2011 at 6:03 pm

    And by the way, my americanistic translation of what is intended by “Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei” is “Political Society of Nationalistic Working Germans“, or “Patriotic Society of Employed Germans“. This translation is based on my experience with modern Germans, how they talk about themselves, and how they are unified as a society.

    Also, The Nazi Party was aimed at people who work for a living, middle and lower class, and not intended to redistribute wealth.

    Sounds very much like “The Tea Party” (which isn’t a Political Party) and GOP. Messages, from the right wing, are similar.

    Except now, the right wing embraces The Jewish People.

    But it still hates The Queers.

    Reply
  7. McCullough says:
    8/16/2011 at 6:17 pm

    Dvorak is right…this guy is a Democrat in wolfs clothing.

    No fundamental Christians in the White House…EVER!!!!!!

    Reply
  8. What? says:
    8/16/2011 at 6:30 pm

    Reagan was a member of the Democratic Party before 1962.

    it’s hopeless Charlie Brown.

    Reply
  9. LibertyLover says:
    8/17/2011 at 4:34 am

    #40,

    38, Liberty Lover,

    That is your reason for voting against someone else?

    That is my citing a historical reference. Are you saying Bill Clinton would have beaten Bush Sr. without Perot concurrently running?

    Unknown. Libertarians are closer to Liberals in quite a few different areas. Clinton may have won by a larger margin.

    I agree that there is always more than 2 choices. The question is the way you vote strategic or symbolic when confronted with more than 2 choices?

    I vote neither. I vote for the person whom I believe will make the better president.

    Why vote for someone you KNOW is inept? That is truly vote wasting because the lesser of two evils is still evil.

    This argument was hashed repeatedly on this board in 2007. People were saying, “I’m voting for whoever runs against the republican.” They didn’t care who the democrat was.

    Well, we’ve seen how THAT works out.

    I’m truly amazed the attitudes haven’t changed. The only way these two parties get their shit in one sock is to let them know we are no longer going to be suckered into believing anything they say.

    Reply
  10. President Amabo says:
    8/17/2011 at 9:20 am

    #49 – You’ve got that right. Liberals want to take away your economic freedom while Conservatives want to take away your social freedom.

    You pretty much have to prioritize. Right now, I prioritize toward economic freedom since it takes about 150K to reach the minimum acceptable American standard of living. That needs to be fixed.

    Reply
  11. Guyver says:
    8/17/2011 at 12:35 pm

    45, What?,

    Sounds more far right, than far left, to me.

    Also from the Wiki (see Nazism):

    The self-identification term, used by exponents of the ideology past and present is National Socialism and adherents describe themselves as National Socialists. For instance the best known organisation expousing this system, the German party led by Adolf Hitler was called the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (German abbreviation: NSDAP). Similarly, the second volume of Mein Kampf is entitled The National SOCIALIST Movement. According to Joseph Goebbels in an official exposition of the ideology, the logic behind the synthesis of Nationalism and SOCIALISM as represented in the name, was to “counter the Internationalism of Marxism with the nationalism of a German SOCIALISM”.

    49, LibertyLover,

    I vote neither. I vote for the person whom I believe will make the better president.

    I’m with you in spirit. But if push comes to shove, and I know there’s little chance my choice will win due to the splitting of votes, I will choose whichever choice will minimize the bleeding. At some point, do you want to get results to chip away towards a goal or do you make a symbolic gesture in the name of idealism?

    Reply
  12. LibertyLover says:
    8/17/2011 at 2:04 pm

    #51, If you were “with me,” you would NOT consider voting for the right man to be a symbol. Do you symbolically punish your kid when he does wrong?

    It is your “self-rationalization” that has caused the mess we are in now. It has not gotten better by chips. It’s gotten worse by chunks.

    Stop the cycle, change your attitude, and start preaching the truth (you know the truth) — there is no difference between Obama, Bachman, Perry, Romney, et al, not by an inch.

    There is only one real choice and he has proven time and again he is right.

    Ron Paul.

    Reply
  13. What? says:
    8/17/2011 at 4:35 pm

    Guyver, so let me guess, you have accute OCD?

    Reply
  14. What? says:
    8/17/2011 at 4:44 pm

    Guyver,

    From the Wiki:  ”To ease concerns among potential middle-class nationalist supporters, Drexler made clear that unlike Marxists, the party supported middle-class citizens, and that the party’s socialist policy was meant to give social welfare to German citizens deemed part of the Aryan race.[13] They became one of many völkisch movements that existed in Germany at the time. Like other völkisch groups, the DAP advocated the belief that through profit-sharing instead of socialisation Germany should become a unified “national community” (Volksgemeinschaft) rather than a society divided along class and party lines.[16] This ideology was explicitly anti-Semitic as it declared that the “national community” must be judenfrei (“free of Jews”).[citation needed] As early as 1920, the party was raising money by selling a tobacco called Anti-Semit.[17]

    Also from Wiki:

    “Fichte promoted German exceptionalism and stressed the need for the German nation to be purified.”

    Interesting that exceptionalism is a Nazi declaration.

    But you don’t know any Germans do you? 

    Reply
  15. Mr. Ed - the Imitation (accept no original) says:
    8/18/2011 at 8:10 am

    Guyver,

    Be a little intellectually honest here. The Nazis were socialists. Liberals / Progressives are much closer to Nazis than any Conservative.

    Yup! The Rush Limbaugh “I hate America” theme is so well entrenched in the right wing nuts minds. Hitler was not a socialist and Stalin was not a communist. NAZIs were indeed, far right conservatives.

    Reply
  16. Mr. Ed - the Imitation (accept no original) says:
    8/18/2011 at 8:18 am

    #51, Guyver,

    You don’t understand the difference between a proper name and a noun.

    Hint 1); they are usually differentiated by capitalizing the first letter for a proper name.

    Hint 2) Hitler did not nationalize any German company although many were brought under state control for war purposes. The same was done by Churchill and Roosevelt, all in the name of the “War Effort”.

    Reply

« Older Comments

Leave a Response


Bad Behavior has blocked 24873 access attempts in the last 7 days.